An Honest President!
he still stands
Posts: 2,835
I've always felt like Obama is truely an honest man and conveys meaning when he speaks - rather than conceal meaning, which is how I felt about the Bushes, Reagan, and Clinton somewhat. But is his fight for a "good cause" crippling us? Is Obama "immanentizing the eschaton?"
From the late social critic, author, philosopher, and founder of the guns & dope party
- Robert Anton Wilson: (Celine is the main character in the book "The Illuminatus! Trilogy)
Celine's Third Law
Citing Lenin and his successors as examples, Wilson argues that the most tyrannical and brutal regimes in history were created by honest politicians who believed in a good cause.An honest politician is a national calamity.
Celine recognizes that the third law seems preposterous from the beginning. While a dishonest politician is interested only in bettering his own lot through abusing the public trust, an honest politician is far more dangerous since he is honestly interested in bettering society through political action, and that means writing and implementing more and more laws.
Celine argues that creating more laws simply creates more criminals. Laws inherently restrict individual freedom, and the explosive rate at which laws are being created means that every citizen in the course of his daily life does not have the research capacity to not violate at least one of the plethora of laws. It is only through honest politicians trying to change the world through laws that true tyranny can come into being through excessive legislation.
Corrupt politicians simply line their own pockets. Honest idealist politicians cripple the people's freedom through enormous amounts of laws. So corrupt politicians are preferable according to Celine.
--a good example of this would be Lenin... it has historical accuracy IMO
-- thoughts???
From the late social critic, author, philosopher, and founder of the guns & dope party
- Robert Anton Wilson: (Celine is the main character in the book "The Illuminatus! Trilogy)Celine's Third Law
Citing Lenin and his successors as examples, Wilson argues that the most tyrannical and brutal regimes in history were created by honest politicians who believed in a good cause.An honest politician is a national calamity.
Celine recognizes that the third law seems preposterous from the beginning. While a dishonest politician is interested only in bettering his own lot through abusing the public trust, an honest politician is far more dangerous since he is honestly interested in bettering society through political action, and that means writing and implementing more and more laws.
Celine argues that creating more laws simply creates more criminals. Laws inherently restrict individual freedom, and the explosive rate at which laws are being created means that every citizen in the course of his daily life does not have the research capacity to not violate at least one of the plethora of laws. It is only through honest politicians trying to change the world through laws that true tyranny can come into being through excessive legislation.
Corrupt politicians simply line their own pockets. Honest idealist politicians cripple the people's freedom through enormous amounts of laws. So corrupt politicians are preferable according to Celine.
--a good example of this would be Lenin... it has historical accuracy IMO
-- thoughts???
Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
The argument I see is that between concealing and conveying. I think it is dangerous to passively accept politicians who conceal, for whatever reason. You seem to disapprove of the past four presidents and their concealing, yet imply it is better to not change such tactics. To me, that sounds like a job well done by the rhetoric of concealing minded politicians: "you can't handle the truth!" No matter what happens, Obama isn't going to be sicking the hounds on us; don't fear the gulag.
A loss of freedom is unequivocably bad. I don't need a "leader." I am my own leader. Now we COULD compare the "righteous" leader to the "corrupt" leader. Certainly, there is a lot of blood on the hands of past presidents and Obama will probably be seen as more of a sympathetic figure. So good/bad?... I don't know. Over the long run this theory will predict the "corrupt" leader will bring better results. But then again, it is just a theory.
That wasn't my intention... but you're right it does read that way. I was merely providing an example of what Wilson is talking about. I am definitely NOT in the "Obama is a Socialist" Camp.
This is just a theory... I'm not saying it is absolute truth or that I "believe" in it or that we should keep on electing criminals like Bush.
I assume that is just a hyperbole. I don't think that Obama is going to become radical because I believe he is inherently good. But sometimes people with a lot of power think they know what is "good" for their subordinates... which can be dangerous.
Why is everyone quoting this mother fucker lately?
I am highly skeptical of the man,
given his confused and ill-clarified relationship with "the conspiracy" itself,
and having read his book, "Everything Is Under Control: Conspiracies, Cults, and Cover-ups", and having noted some of the more serious omissions of fact that seem to leave it suspiciously in danger of being a "cover-up" itself.
Someone clue me in on this new resurgence of RAW love.
???
I guess i should just break down and read the Illuminatus Trilogy,
but first i have to finish Pike's Morals & Dogma (confusing enough on its own).
If I opened it now would you not understand?
that's not to say obama is about to do the same, or is honest.
100 percent agreed
RAW is a conspiracy theorist satirist. If you don't know that then you have zero knowledge of the man, and there is no reason to be "skeptical" of him without knowing anything about him. Ok ok that is a bit harsh... sorry. The resurgence in the RAW love on this board (it existed before?) is all my doing. I admit it - I'm a bit obsessed lately. I read a book per month or so by the guy and he had an amazing mind.
Only a small percentage of his work is based on conspiracy theories, which he uses as a social critic and for entertainment value only. My favorite quote of his is: "You should view the world as a giant conspiracy run by a small group of nearly omnipotent people, and you should view those people as yourself and your friends." (ok I'm paraphrasing here)